Race Stat Changes

[Hanibal]

So, you are talking about nerfing stats, adding end to the lil folk (DE, Gnome, Lings) and taking away from the bigger folk (Horcs and Dwarfs)?

Isnt that the opposite of balancing?

Only thing Dwarves have going for them is HPs and Horcs Str, neither class can dodge so really need both. Wouldn't it be easier to balance damage, I mean do we want pvp interaction or people getting rounded before they even know they were attacked?

I have a Ling minstrel that lasts longer in a fight then most of my zerker's, ninjas and slayers. Its dmg output is comparable to all of those classes except the slayers, minus flurry and RH of course, but if you hit and dodge more those attacks dont matter, have to be alive to land them.

Just one example of a class/race that fits well and I'm just thinking maybe that's why some class/races do better if they are matched up properly, like a horc priest should suck.

Just my 2 cents

[anthriel]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15EUNEHza_TEiL4Qw-RofGVNX1mcBPQ0T9Ri8pB3EfXA/edit?usp=sharing

Fucking around based on your values and mine, maybe that would be better on what is there now?

I thought your original proposal better... The fighter races side of spectrum seem to work ok and don't need changing imo... On the balance/magic races side, Ling/gnome could use a buff cos of how important HP is in the game and Elf/DE (possibly Hum and HE) could use corresponding buffs also to ensure they aren't made useless by the Ling/gnome buffs.

My 2 cents on thoughts shared by others:
1. I kind of agree with Lat's comment that INT just isn't as important to overall gameplay as other stats (not saying it should be, but we need to be realistic that giving a -1/+1 INT change isn't that game-changing for a race)
2. I disagree with Eld's spreadsheet comment that a 24int gnome could be an OP Mage cos tbh I'd prolly still not want to use it cos it dies too easily in both pvp and pve (if I had to use such a gnome I'd still +1 End or Agi if possible rather than Int).... I do agree with Eld's observation that buffing gnomes without buffing elves could leave elves more overshadowed
3. I disagree with NH's comment that he kept Goblins wisdom low otherwise they would make OP Druids... Even if you gave Gobs max 20 wis (and they actually had enough allocation points to make a Druid with max Wis/Agi/Str/End), the way you have done the morph scaling formula and its high dependence on wis rather than base stats makes me doubt they would overshadow the Elementals at 24 wis... I'm guessing they'd only come out at around 28-29 Str and 24ish Agi in cat morph which isn't great compared to Eles for the same HP.

Basically I suspect there are probably 2 fundamental issues that have cause need to rebalance races more drastically from the values largely used in RoK:
1. Potion cooldown in EO means HP matters most in any group fight / OAD party cos it allows you to hold on till priest can heal. Veterans likely won't care about getting max Int for an extra 8-16 damage per blast when u can quite easily die b4 being able to use it.
2. Introduction of races like Elemental alongside morph formulas that focus only on their advantages make them the premier race for Druids... They are also currently top choice for mages imo (due to importance of HP) ... All of this has resulted in need for entire MR system changes and now rebalancing of overshadowed races etc just to try and deal with outliers like these.

Perhaps an easier fix would be to (a) close the End gap as you originally intended to make HP considerations less pronounced and (b) then to look at how you can fix acute issues that cause imbalance such as Elemental race or Druid morph scaling formula.

[Styx]

Horc is your strongest possible melee fighter with the highest end, horc needs the lowest possible magic resis, compared to Drake at 12 wis, they should be switched

[daedroth]

Gnome: +1 Agl seems fine. I think they should be a bit more dodgy.
Goblin: I think are fine the way they are. Their INT should be somewhere between Horc/Human, 15 INT is meh - I just do not see them being that dumb.
Dark Elf: +1 End seems fine... in this game they are the physical elfs, so it makes sense.
Hafling: Undecided, I think they should be fragile, but I also think they need something.
Humans: I think should have 13 CHR baseline that doesnt cost points, but you cant put any lower. They really need something, and that would not be over powering.
Horcs/Dwarves: I think are fine the way they are. I think the proposed changes would make them meh. Dwarves are decent, but they are not OP the way they are. Horcs already fair poorly vs sauria in physical combat, taking away their STR would make that even worse (esp. With AGL changes upcoming).
Idea on Horcs though... rename them orcs or add in orcs as a race and set the horcs somewhere in between human and orcs and have orcs use the horcs stats right now.

[NiteHawk]

2. Introduction of races like Elemental alongside morph formulas that focus only on their advantages make them the premier race for Druids... They are also currently top choice for mages imo (due to importance of HP) ... All of this has resulted in need for entire MR system changes and now rebalancing of overshadowed races etc just to try and deal with outliers like these.

Perhaps an easier fix would be to (a) close the End gap as you originally intended to make HP considerations less pronounced and (b) then to look at how you can fix acute issues that cause imbalance such as Elemental race or Druid morph scaling formula.

Yeah Druids need to be looked at in general, mainly their formulas/etc.

I will state that, for enchanters:

1. There are about 70 enchanters in the game at the moment.
2. 59% are gnomes. 22% are elves, 8% are elementals, 6% are halflings. Rest are scattered races.

A lot of people, at least on discord, disagree that gnomes are useless in any case.

---

Gnome: +1 Agl seems fine. I think they should be a bit more dodgy.
Goblin: I think are fine the way they are. Their INT should be somewhere between Horc/Human, 15 INT is meh - I just do not see them being that dumb.
Dark Elf: +1 End seems fine... in this game they are the physical elfs, so it makes sense.

The thing is goblins are literally overshadowing dark-elves.
Right now its:
DE: 20 22 18 20 20 16
Gob: 19 22 20 17 17 14
But with the MR bonus it's more like:
DE: 20 22 18 20 20 16
Gob: 19 22 20 17 20 14

Meaning you lose one str, in favor of two end. Int has a impact but not so much on paladins etc. The MR bonus is probably to high in general, anyways.

---

So, you are talking about nerfing stats, adding end to the lil folk (DE, Gnome, Lings) and taking away from the bigger folk (Horcs and Dwarfs)?

Isnt that the opposite of balancing?

Only thing Dwarves have going for them is HPs and Horcs Str, neither class can dodge so really need both. Wouldn't it be easier to balance damage, I mean do we want pvp interaction or people getting rounded before they even know they were attacked?

Actually the reason for dropping Dwarves to 22END is that some chars sit at 1450-1480HP. That's a bit crazy. It also helps fix the gap but on the other way (for example, instead of 18 end to 23 end, its 17 end to 22 end.) They (right now) are -3 str for MR pretty much.

Dropping the half-orc STR was something I'm playing with, it's not a set in stone thing. The thing is though if you bump up damage or lower damage, you'll accidentally make other races gain an advantage or disadvantage without wanting to do that. Same reason why just bumping up END wouldn't work, as other races would also benefit from it, making the effects of the change not so good. My issue is that 25 STR HO's are 'really' difficult to balance. 25 STR also makes some derpy high damage when you factor in multipliers, which is a problem.

I would think that with these changes though AGI would need alot less impact of a change too, anyways.

But the only races that I am proposing atm are De and Lings atm.. I mean with lings you're still gonna be sitting around 960HP vs 1200HP-1225HP on average.

Right now 25 str HO slayers deal 762 max with a 4% ember, dwing, and a radiant dagger. 748 max with a brill. Not factoring in some reduction with armor but it's not that much lost. Dunno about that. The loss of the STR would be about 28-30 damage removed from it.

Not to go totally off topic but I think some of this stems from int not having a huge impact. I think its the reason we are seeing dwarf clerics and paladins do so well the healing amount and even damage amount isnt that huge per point. I mean you can get +180-240hp and at 17int compared to 20int and only lose what 30-40 healing hp on aid? maybe 10-12hp on a paladin per heal?

We lowered the amount healed because it ended up being infinity fights when it was higher. It's more around 18HP for heal though, which (to me) is not too bad.

I'm not sure where you get this dwarf paladin/cleric thing being a thing though. Out of the created clerics, 28 are dwarf. (which is actually surprising.) I get that you have to factor in some things but even with the numbers 158 are elves, 82 are freaking gnomes, 48 are HE, 100 are human, 30 are lings, 73 are elemental, 12 are DE. 28 dwarves.

To me, 40HP per aid is a pretty good amount specially as your not comparing min/max int values of some races. Physical damage is literally 6-10 damage per point too, so it's quite similar, and seems to be good. Could be a little higher but not by much.

For paladins, 95 are dwarves, 95 are elf, 6 are elemental, 29 are DE, 68 are ling, 40 HE, 92 human. Paladins I can understand as you never really max INT out I would assume though still on elves/etc it is higher overall from what I can see. 18HP more per heal isn't that bad to me either.


When it comes to blasting, if max damage with about 10% div is around 198 damage with burst and 23 int, that means 17 int is at around 150 damage, and 20 int is 174. Again, could do with small tweaks, but it's not really far off. I'm not against/for giving gnomes a +1 yet but the other solution is to tweak INT as you say so it impacts a litle more per int point, thus giving something similar. The higher INT goes, the harder it is to balance if you guys feel that int is not enough per point.

[daedroth]

... The thing is goblins are literally overshadowing dark-elves.
Right now its:
DE: 20 22 18 20 20 16
Gob: 19 22 20 17 17 14
But with the MR bonus it's more like:
DE: 20 22 18 20 20 16
Gob: 19 22 20 17 20 14

Meaning you lose one str, in favor of two end. Int has a impact but not so much on paladins etc. The MR bonus is probably to high in general, anyways.

But if you give the DE +1 END then they wont be.

[NiteHawk]

But if you give the DE +1 END then they wont be.

I think just lowering the bonus to 15% instead of 20% would be enough if we give DE +1 end yeah. People aren't factoring in stat allocation, which DE's are better at too for paladins/etc. With lower wisdom, you don't need to give them as many allocation points, thus they can't be 'as good' for classes that require many stats. If the wisdom was increased, you'd give them 2-3 allocation points too, thus making them too equal/similar. So I think it's actually OK as it is with just giving DE a +1 and lowering the racial MR bonus on gobins to 15%.

Based on max wis and the changes, its 36.5% hitrate with HE and 39% hitrate with Goblins, so fairly similar with the bonus. 20% puts it exactly the same at 36.5 hitrate though. The benifit though is if you don't put max wisdom, which you often don't, obviously goblins end up being better, which is OK in that scenario.

[NiteHawk]

P.S. Put both proposes here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

There's also a possibility of if you remove the max end you could bump all END by lets say 10-30HP too with the above.

[Styx]

On agi you need to set a top and bottom value
Human i thought was the baseline for all stats , this is depending on what you set as a baseline.

Ie 24 str is current top and 18 str is lowest
So agi needs some kind of adjustment cause horc is 19 agi human is the baseline at 20 agi it's no contest with orc 22 end and 23 str.

Therefor you need to set one with lowest agi horc in this example, could be 18 agi ,, as compared to ling 18 str

Either way to balance the human baseline 20 agi then some class or classes need adjusted down for agi

Ling would be top agi. So lowest str and end, horc would be highest str and end with lowest agi, it should not be 19 cause human is 20, 1 point diffetence

All others would have to fall in between as the average player character for dammage, agi, magic resis etc

Just thoughts take it or whichever.

Edit, the highest end class would be mainly melee, there for it needs the lowest magic resis, Drake is currently 12 wis and 20 end orc is 14 wis and 22 end, that's 2 end points with better magic resis and highest str

Edit 2, chr is a catch all for leftover points, if it would make HP and ot mp higher might be something

Could make min require for classes?

[NiteHawk]

I don't want to readd min requirements for classes again no. I think it kind of ruins the whole 'do what you want to do' thing.

In defense of orc MR, Saurians esp are claimed to be better, and the bonus value makes little difference with such low MR anyways. Raising Drakes makes them on par with saurians, which would be too much IMO since drakes get some differences that saurians do not get.